Slashdot Mirror


New Maglev Elevator Can Travel Horizontally, Vertically, and Diagonally (wired.co.uk)

An elevator that can move in any direction has been successfully tested by a German company named ThyssenKrupp. An anonymous reader quotes Wired UK: The Multi is the first ropeless lift, built using the same magnetic levitation technology used in Japan's bullet train and proposed for the Hyperloop. In the same way the train slides along a track horizontally, the lift travels both vertically, horizontally and diagonally around a building riding an electromagnetic field, a system known as a linear drive. "If you can run a 500-tonne train on magnets at 500km/h you should be able to elevate a cabin of 500 kilograms or 1,000 kilograms at a speed of five metres per second," [ThyssenKrupp CEO Andreas] Schierenbeck said.
The elevator can cost 3 to 5 times more than a regular elevator -- but can handle higher buildings than a conventional elevator.

213 comments

  1. Turn the power off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...and watch it FALL!

    1. Re:Turn the power off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Turn the FALL off and watch if POWER!!!

    2. Re:Turn the power off by aliquis · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      ...and watch it FALL!

      ... which is good because then you could harness that energy!

    3. Re:Turn the power off by Kokuyo · · Score: 2

      Seriously? Do you think that wouldn't happen with conventional elevators if they had no emergency braking system?

    4. Re:Turn the power off by amalcolm · · Score: 4, Informative

      No, not really. The ones with cables have a counterweight, so they tend to stay put, unless the cable snaps - that's when you need emergency brakes. The hydraulic ones will descend if there is a leak or power fail, but still at a relatively safe pace.

      --
      Time for bed, said Zebedee - boing
    5. Re:Turn the power off by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 2

      Seriously? Do you think that wouldn't happen with conventional elevators if they had no emergency braking system?

      Exactly. ... but how would you install an emergency breaking system on a (contactless!) Maglev system without seriously restricting the the directions in which this can move? (diagonally...)

      Maybe they do have a solution, but the article is entirely silent on the subject...

    6. Re:Turn the power off by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, not really. The ones with cables have a counterweight, so they tend to stay put, unless the cable snaps - that's when you need emergency brakes. The hydraulic ones will descend if there is a leak or power fail, but still at a relatively safe pace.

      There's more than one emergency break system on elevators. One is a wheel break on the pulley, which engages in the case of power loss (or in normal operation, while elevator is at a floor).

      The other is the track break, which engages in the event where the rope snaps (clamps on the cabin that seize the metal tracks that guide the cabin).

      Both would be difficult to put in place on a Maglev system.

    7. Re:Turn the power off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I imagine that some sort of "blades" could pop out of the tube's wall and lock the elevator in place, not allowing it to fall.

    8. Re:Turn the power off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not really. Look at the Vancouver Skytrain or any other linear motor system in use. When the train stops, it puts wheels down and brakes.

      The thing I'd be worried about here is the brakes failing due to weight restrictions being ignored, and that would be easily solved by having the elevator detect brake stress and automatically go out of service.

    9. Re:Turn the power off by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      I doubt in practice the elevator will have such a free range of movement. Main benefit would be that the elevator could move into sidings for loading/unloading and allow others to pass. It looks like this has tracks, so a brake connected to the track should work.

    10. Re:Turn the power off by amalcolm · · Score: 1

      I'm sure you are right. I was responding to the assertion that conventional elevators would fall if there is a power loss.

      --
      Time for bed, said Zebedee - boing
    11. Re:Turn the power off by Zocalo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Presumably some form of clamp on the elevator car that can be used as an emergency brake and safety lock against either the maglev power rail or an auxilliary safety rail as and when required, just as many current conventional elevators have. It may be able to move in any direction, but that's still dependant on there being a power rail alongside it in the direction it needs to go, which means many of the same safety designs would still apply - the only change is that to make the most of the maglev you need to avoid physical contact until required.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    12. Re:Turn the power off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Both would be difficult to put in place on a Maglev system."

      Rubbish, track brakes work fine. The primary system will be the same safety system used on most rollercoasters for overspeed protection, combined with a soft stop suspension system for braking to zero speed at the bottom.

    13. Re:Turn the power off by sjbe · · Score: 1

      Exactly. ... but how would you install an emergency breaking system on a (contactless!) Maglev system without seriously restricting the the directions in which this can move? (diagonally...)

      Contactless is not the same thing as impossible to make contact. It will ride in close proximity to the magnets/rails. Wouldn't be hard to come up with a system that would physically engage in the event of a problem.

    14. Re:Turn the power off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Strangely enough, you might like to read the article...

      That's what the building that this lift was installed in was designed to be used for.

      (Clue: it's for developing & testing lifts, and sometimes dropping them).

    15. Re:Turn the power off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What makes you think this is contactless?

      This is a rope-less elevator using linear motors instead. There's still guides, etc

    16. Re:Turn the power off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parachute!

    17. Re:Turn the power off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ........ and watch its brakes lock.

      This kind of system is going to need brakes anyways for when the car is stopped for long periods at a floor, most likely a set of rails running along either side of the car with clamps on the car that are electromagnetically held open. If the power fails the brakes simply see that as a command to fully engage. A similar system exists in current cable elevators, if the cable is cut for some reason the sudden lack of tension on the mechanism at the top of the car causes it to deploy its on car braking system.

    18. Re:Turn the power off by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 1

      I'd be more interested to see what happens when the Elevator gets hacked

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    19. Re:Turn the power off by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The biggest benefit would be that you could have a separate up and down track: with all of the cars always travelling in the same direction, you can fit a lot more of them in a circuit. In the space of three conventional elevators (one up track, one down track, and one waiting space between them) you could potentially have three cars per floor (in practice, congestion would make the optimal number a lot less than this).

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    20. Re:Turn the power off by Chrisq · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, not really. The ones with cables have a counterweight, so they tend to stay put, unless the cable snaps - that's when you need emergency brakes. The hydraulic ones will descend if there is a leak or power fail, but still at a relatively safe pace.

      A lift engineer told me that the counterweight is usually set for somewhere near half the maximum load to minimise energy use, so if all power and the brakes fail you will go up if you are alone in the lift or down if you are in a fully loaded lift. He said that modern lifts are built so that if this does occur it is survivable without injury by having a either buffer or fixed slides at the bottom of the shaft, and having either the same at the top or enough "jump space" for the lift car to continue once the counterweight hits the bottom until gravity makes it fall back against the cables. I imagine that must be scary.

    21. Re:Turn the power off by religionofpeas · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Also, if you have permanent magnets on the track, you could make an eddy current brake just by moving a big piece of metal in close proximity. This piece of metal could be spring loaded to automatically return to the braking position when power goes out.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    22. Re: Turn the power off by JoeRobe · · Score: 1

      Exactly. In the simplest version of this, the brakes can be spring loaded such that power is required to keep them off the track. If the power cuts, the springs force the brakes into the rail and halts the elevator.

      Air brake systems on large trucks work this way, except instead of electricity keeping the emergency ("spring") brake disengaged, its compressed air. If there's ever a catastrophic loss of air pressure (drops below about 30 psi), the spring brake pops on and locks the wheels.

      --
      The best way to predict the future is to invent it.
    23. Re:Turn the power off by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      It depends on the type of maglev technology used. The Japanese trains have wheels that come down when they stop, but in an emergency where there is sudden power loss they wouldn't just drop down instantly anyway. Other types use permanent magnets which provide levitation even when not moving, and only use electrical current to move.

      In any case, I can't see a problem adding brakes to a maglev lift. It just needs suitable guide rails.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    24. Re:Turn the power off by Port-0 · · Score: 1

      This is a system involving magnets and conductors, so when the power goes out and the car begins to drop, it could be made to induce a current which generates a force that resists its movement. This is Lenz's law. Maybe they have figured out a way to use Lenz's Law, in this scenario, allowing the elevator car gently come to rest at the bottom in the event of a power loss.

      Lenz's Law: The direction of current induced in a conductor by a changing magnetic field due to Faraday's law of induction will be such that it will create a magnetic field that opposes the change that produced it.
      -- from wikipedia

    25. Re:Turn the power off by Cytotoxic · · Score: 3, Informative

      If you look at the actual product, it doesn't move freely in space, it is on a track. There is a rotating section of track like a railroad turntable that allows it to switch tracks.

      That is where all of the hyperbole about "any direction, even diagonally" comes from. The thing moves on a track. Having the ability to switch tracks means you can have multiple cars in each elevator shaft, and cars can potentially pass one another.

      Since they are installing one of these things in an actual commercial building under construction in Germany, I'm sure they have an emergency braking system.
      Looking at the track, it doesn't appear as if it is a "contactless" maglev system. It looks like it is running on some sort of track and using a linear electric motor for propulsion. This means that they could simply use an inertial braking system like regular elevators - if the car goes too fast, braking weights fly out and stop the car.

    26. Re:Turn the power off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure real engineers need to be lectured by obese neckbeards (snicker).

    27. Re: Turn the power off by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I am kinda curious why they thought the engineers had overlooked safety. It's kinda silly to think they hadn't actually, you know, thought about gravity. Kids today...

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    28. Re:Turn the power off by vlad30 · · Score: 1

      Still runs on Rails so I imagine the rails have safety built in the advantage is that the car can be moved sideways so that another car can pass in the same shaft so multiple cars can use fewer shafts. It certainly isn't a wonkavator at best maybe a Turbolift . Yes I read the article and watched the video sosume

      --
      Your'e all thinking it, I just said it for you
    29. Re:Turn the power off by necro81 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Both would be difficult to put in place on a Maglev system.

      The maglev part is kind of a misnomer. It's not using magnetic levitation, per se, but rather using linear motors to move around. Yes, maglev trains use that technology to travel, but so do a number of launched roller coasters out there. Any it's being used as a replacement for the steam catapult in the latest U.S. aircraft carrier.

      The elevator car is still in contact with a track, for mechanical and electrical reasons. It almost certainly has track brakes that require energy to release. That is, in the event of power loss, they are spring-loaded to engage automatically.

      Additionally, since we are talking about a motor, you can do dynamic braking: short the stator windings together, and the back-emf created by the passing magnets will create a substantial drag force. Want to try at home? Drop a neodymium magnet down a copper pipe and see how long it takes. Or take an ordinary DC motor, short the leads together, then try to backdrive it.

    30. Re:Turn the power off by necro81 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Exactly. ... but how would you install an emergency breaking system on a (contactless!) Maglev system without seriously restricting the the directions in which this can move? (diagonally...)

      Because of the shoddy writing in the article and the summary, I can understand why you would think it's contactless. But it isn't. The similarity with maglev trains and the hyperloop is the fact that it uses a linear motor to move along the track. The elevator car is still affixed to a track/rail and does not levitate. When it needs to go sideways, it does so at specially located switchpoints where it traverses a horizontal track. This would be obvious from reading the articles or, for the short-attention-spanned, watching the embedded videos.

    31. Re: Turn the power off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Modern rollercoasters use this for over speed protection.

    32. Re:Turn the power off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You won't need to emergency break to decelerate a magnetic electric system.
      Just like with electric vehicles or spinning hard drives you can brake by pushing energy back to the power source.
      The system can self power during downwards movement.

      You should still have emergency brakes, but it might not be necessary to use them during brownouts.

    33. Re:Turn the power off by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Informative

      The thing I'd be worried about here is the brakes failing due to weight restrictions being ignored

      Elevator brakes are way over engineered. They can handle way more weight than could possibly be crammed into the cab. Brakes can be designed so they require power to retract, so automatically engage in a power-failure. Elevator brakes are also designed to automatically trip if speed thresholds are exceeded, and the tripping mechanism is purely mechanical, requiring no power.

      Quibble about TFS: The Japanese Shinkansen are not maglev. They run on wheels.

    34. Re:Turn the power off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Or short-circuit the motor windings on an electric bike. You'll be able to push it (with some effort) but unable to get enough speed to ride it. Not even downhill.

    35. Re:Turn the power off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hack the controller, turn it into a railgun that launches 500kg payloads through the roof. Vertically or diagonally . . .

    36. Re:Turn the power off by jacks0n · · Score: 1

      Yah, you can either just short out the end turns on a three phase linear synchronous motor and get drag proportional to speed or you can have a secondary set of magnets dragging past aluminium fins, or likely both. Both surprisingly effective braking methods, and not magic.

      to try at home, get a NeFeB magnet, a half inch aluminum plate, and try to move one past the other.

    37. Re:Turn the power off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Brakes can be designed so they require power to retract, so automatically engage in a power-failure

      Which raises the question, how do you power an elevator car that has no cables?

    38. Re:Turn the power off by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Battery packs and recharging when stationary. Or you could use that powerful maglev field for some inductive charging.

    39. Re: Turn the power off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The same way they do for electric trains. Have powered rails. When they say these can move in multiple directions, they're still in a plane and wouldn't be moving arbitrarily. That would require too much floor space to be given up. More likely, it would be l shaped at points or possibly stairstepped.

      Having a freight elevator that could execute a 90 degree turn at the bottom would be very useful. Similarly, allowing passengers to enter the elevator based on their needs or having the elevators do circuits could be great.

    40. Re:Turn the power off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not normally a spelling nazi, but I make an exception in this case: Please differentiate between 'break' and 'brake'; the former means something got damaged or destroyed; the latter means slowing something down. 'Brake' is appropriate here; 'break' in the context of an experimental elevator system will just make people extremely nervous.

    41. Re:Turn the power off by Thelasko · · Score: 1

      The other is the track break, which engages in the event where the rope snaps (clamps on the cabin that seize the metal tracks that guide the cabin).

      Both would be difficult to put in place on a Maglev system.

      I was thinking about this type while reading the article. I think it can be done quite simply. Just make the car two parts. The inner part holds the passengers, and the outer part (carrier) has the maglev equipment. Basically, the carrier takes the place of the cable. In the event of a maglev failure, the force between the two components will be zero, and the clamps would activate.

      My question is, what happens when the car stops at a floor. Is it held in place mechanically? Is a magnetic field holding it in place?

      --
      One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
    42. Re:Turn the power off by srmalloy · · Score: 2

      Having a continuous-loop system, while it would allow you to put more cars in the loop, is vulnerable to a single-point-of-failure attack; jamming one car's door open piles up every car in the loop behind that one; doing that with a conventional elevator bank disables only that one elevator. To a lesser degree, this could happen under normal use simply by having people being slow getting on and off, or by having someone hold the 'door open' button to allow someone to keep the elevator on a floor to allow someone to catch that car. The problem could be reduced by having each loop feeding two or more loading stations per floor, but that adds more complexity to the system.

    43. Re:Turn the power off by newcastlejon · · Score: 1

      Having a continuous-loop system, while it would allow you to put more cars in the loop, is vulnerable to a single-point-of-failure attack; jamming one car's door open piles up every car in the loop behind that one; doing that with a conventional elevator bank disables only that one elevator.

      This is an improvement over paternoster lifts: the cars aren't tied together and, since they can move in more than one direction, it's possible to have places where they can move to one side to pass each other as you see on single lane country roads.

      --
      If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
    44. Re:Turn the power off by hattig · · Score: 1

      Certainly you would also have redundant paths on any building tall enough to warrant using this system. For example, three up, three down, and something like 24 lifts in operation on those six shafts at peak times.

      Maybe even overtaking paths, if the path-changing mechanism is fast and smooth. It would enable a building to offer a 'rapid elevator' function without needing a dedicated lift shaft.

      Basically, it's a vertical passenger transportation highway, which is what these buildings have needed for a long time. I wouldn't be surprised if the lift scheduling and routing algorithms share a lot in common with modern railway signalling systems.

    45. Re:Turn the power off by encad · · Score: 1

      They salvaged in-house tech for this:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      So probably it will rest on rails and be moved / levitated by linear motors. Since ThyssenKrupp has longstanding experience with elevator system they should be able to design one with security in mind.

    46. Re:Turn the power off by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      The maglev uses tracks, so I fail to see how a track brake system would be difficult.

    47. Re:Turn the power off by neiras · · Score: 1

      Just to be clear, the Vancouver Skytrain always runs on wheels. It's not a maglev; it's standard light rail with a linear induction motor between the rails.

      Skytrain uses the LIM to accelerate and decelerate. It has no motors on its axles.

      Standard friction brakes are used for the last few feet of braking when entering stations, and also during emergency stops.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    48. Re:Turn the power off by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      It's on a track. You clamp the track, same as all the other elevators out there.

    49. Re:Turn the power off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if you have permanent magnets on the track

      No, you'd want non-permanent (electro-) magnets, or your track would be littered with iron filings and other ferro-magnetic gunk in no time...

    50. Re: Turn the power off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The power for maglev comes from the track, not the elevator.

    51. Re: Turn the power off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you get track brakes to work when the car is moving between vertical and horizontal tracks?

  2. Turbolift by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Next week on slashdot: phased energy weapons to be made available to security forces worldwide

    Bit by bit, we're catching up with Star Wars technology.

    1. Re:Turbolift by Vrekais · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You totally made that mistake on purpose...

    2. Re:Turbolift by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yeah. I pressed submit and leaned back in my chair with an evil grin on my face. Someone will track me down and bludgeon me to death for it, but it was worth it.

    3. Re:Turbolift by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, we should in all cases use stupid names from popular culture instead of actually making up useful ones, or at least ones that make sense.

    4. Re:Turbolift by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They'll use a Borg Death Star. Awesome.

    5. Re:Turbolift by JudgeFurious · · Score: 2

      Somebody shoot this Turbolift denier with their Phaser please.

      --
      Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
    6. Re:Turbolift by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you're here for their cookies.

    7. Re:Turbolift by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Surely you mean they'll use the Dalek Galactica from the Peacekeepers.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    8. Re:Turbolift by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      No need to. He's trapped in the holodeck and doesn't know it.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    9. Re:Turbolift by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      reddit is seeping in.....

    10. Re:Turbolift by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Some people just want to watch the world burn...

    11. Re:Turbolift by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aragorn shot first.

    12. Re:Turbolift by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      phased energy weapons to be made available

      Bit by bit

      So...it's a phased deployment?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    13. Re:Turbolift by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1
      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    14. Re:Turbolift by flargleblarg · · Score: 1

      They should call it a Turbolift. Yes, as in Star Trek. Just don't give it an AI, please.

      Up your shaft.

    15. Re:Turbolift by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Up your shaft.

      "I'm fine, how are you?"

  3. A German company named ThyssenKrupp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's like saying an American company named General Electric.

    1. Re: A German company named ThyssenKrupp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      general electric as a name is more akin to modern asian or communist companies though.

      its so.. generic. not like ford or chrysler.

      otoh thyssenkrupp sounds like a new wave asian company. the kind of that puts german inspired labels on its adverts to appear european.

    2. Re: A German company named ThyssenKrupp by amalcolm · · Score: 4, Informative

      Hardly. A huge German steel/engineering conglomerate going back a century or more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      --
      Time for bed, said Zebedee - boing
    3. Re: A German company named ThyssenKrupp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A neighbour of mine is a ThyssenKrupp elevator tech, he drives a weird little branded service vehicle. I never knew it was such a large company (OTIS being the only other one I'd heard of).

    4. Re: A German company named ThyssenKrupp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, Krupp has been around for a while ... https://www.google.ch/search?q=z%C3%A4h+wie+leder+hart+wie+kruppstahl :D

    5. Re:A German company named ThyssenKrupp by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

      When Japan was enamored with huge American companies in the 1960s, they created companies like Ordinary Oil, Common Motors. Well, they learned quickly it is not very wise to use a thesaurus with imperfect understanding to name conglomerates ....

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    6. Re: A German company named ThyssenKrupp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you haven't heard of ThyssenKrupp, you must not be in elevators.

    7. Re: A German company named ThyssenKrupp by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Well, most people in the world are currently not in an elevator.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    8. Re:A German company named ThyssenKrupp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, since there was also a British company named General Electric, a UK publication would quite reasonably refer to "an American company named General Electric".

      dom

    9. Re:A German company named ThyssenKrupp by uradu · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I immediately thought this must either have been written by a serious ignoramus, or someone with a beef with Germany in general. Using the Japanese "bullet train" (which isn't maglev) or the mostly vaporware Hyperloop as examples of maglev, instead of the German Transrapid, which is in fact still the only production maglev train in the world is pretty pathetic.

    10. Re:A German company named ThyssenKrupp by djinn6 · · Score: 1

      Ordinary Oil does roll off the tongue pretty well though. Was there a Mundane Motors and Everyday Electric too?

  4. Wonkavator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    NT

    1. Re:Wonkavator by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      I only came here to see if anyone else made this observation.

      Kudos.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    2. Re:Wonkavator by WheezyJoe · · Score: 1

      Only if it has a button "up and out". That works.

      (and, powered by candy?)

      --
      Take it easy, Charlie, I've got an Angle...
  5. the drunk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What is this? A flash back to the turn of the 20th century without limitations?

  6. But will the doors go "shhh!" when they traverse? by TigerPlish · · Score: 4, Funny

    Capt Kirk, Capt. James T. Kirk, you're wanted at Turbolift 1.

    --
    The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
  7. Re:SLASHDOT READER HYPOCRISY by SuperDre · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Ofcourse you'll get a -1.. your post has got nothing to do with the subject.

  8. Nice work, Mr Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Wait, what? Elon Musk isn't involved? But.......how is that even possible? Everyone knows Musk is the world's only living inventor!

    1. Re:Nice work, Mr Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you see the video? The elevator's horizontal speed was around the same speed as walking. So why not just walk?

    2. Re:Nice work, Mr Musk by Ihlosi · · Score: 1
      So why not just walk?

      You're not thinking creatively enough.

      Maybe because there is no hallway to walk. With this kind of elevators, hallways full of doors can be a thing of the past - the elevator just drops you off at your destination.

    3. Re:Nice work, Mr Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because a) a demo of a lift moving a few feet sideways may not entirely represent its potential and b) the fucking article explains the functionality as being potentially useful to move between shafts which answers your redundant question.

    4. Re:Nice work, Mr Musk by geekmux · · Score: 1

      Did you see the video? The elevator's horizontal speed was around the same speed as walking. So why not just walk?

      We live in a world where humans expend the additional effort to type text messages instead of simply speaking to each other in order to communicate, and yet are too lazy to get up and turn off a light switch, or open a browser to search for something, insisting that a voice-controlled in-home digital assistant needs to do that instead.

      Logic knows no bounds.

    5. Re:Nice work, Mr Musk by geekmux · · Score: 2

      So why not just walk?

      You're not thinking creatively enough.

      Maybe because there is no hallway to walk. With this kind of elevators, hallways full of doors can be a thing of the past - the elevator just drops you off at your destination.

      Speaking of creative thinking, I can't wait to see the emergency-exit plan for insanely high buildings with no hallways or doors.

      I mean after all, electricity, elevators, escalators; these are things that have never failed...

    6. Re:Nice work, Mr Musk by Ihlosi · · Score: 4, Interesting
      I can't wait to see the emergency-exit plan for insanely high buildings with no hallways or doors.

      Rocket-powered, parachute-equipped escape pods.

      Never pass up a chance to rocket-power something.

    7. Re:Nice work, Mr Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We live in a world where humans expend the additional effort to type text messages instead of simply speaking to each other in order to communicate, and yet are too lazy to get up and turn off a light switch, or open a browser to search for something, insisting that a voice-controlled in-home digital assistant needs to do that instead.

      Fair enough. But if a hundred people want to go to their rooms/cabins, are 80 people willing to wait while the elevator transports (horz+vert) 20 people? You see, when an elevator operates, it reserves an entire shaft/hallway. So the throughput will be greatly reduced compared to a hundred people walking simultaneously through the same hallway.

    8. Re:Nice work, Mr Musk by geekmux · · Score: 1

      I can't wait to see the emergency-exit plan for insanely high buildings with no hallways or doors.

      Rocket-powered, parachute-equipped escape pods.

      Never pass up a chance to rocket-power something.

      Actually, I was thinking personal drones, but you may be on to something with rocket-powered drones...

    9. Re:Nice work, Mr Musk by jcochran · · Score: 4, Interesting

      With a conventional elevator, you're correct about the "it reserves an entire shaft" concept. That's inherent with presence of either the cable, or hydraulic cylinder. Why would that limitation exist with a maglev elevator? There's no need for one elevator car per shaft. I think 4 shafts would work nicely: Up, Down, Ready, Waiting. And only the Ready shaft has a door accessible to the public. You press the call button and the usual case is the door will open immediately since there's already a car waiting there. After you select your floor, that car moves a short distance towards either the Up or Down shaft and proceeds on your journey. Meanwhile, a nearby car in the Waiting shaft starts its own journey to replace the car you just took. As your car approaches your destination, the car already there starts its own journey to a Waiting Shaft slot to make room for your car.

    10. Re:Nice work, Mr Musk by Sechr+Nibw · · Score: 1

      Why not take it one step further, with Up / Down, Waiting, and Loading / Unloading? There would be two doors then, an entrance and an exit, hopefully not located directly next to each other (to discourage using the "Unloading door" for getting into the elevator). This would make it so a stopped elevator in the process of unloading would not block an Up or Down shaft. It also makes it so you don't have those super important SOBs that crowd the entrance as someone tries to wheel off a cart or something. I suppose an alternative to this would be to have the Ready shaft be for loading and unloading, with doors on both sides to facilitate unloading. Or maybe I'm over-exaggerating the problem of people blocking an elevator exit.

    11. Re:Nice work, Mr Musk by hattig · · Score: 1

      It's not like stairwells are great solutions either, once the fire/smoke gets into them you will asphyxiate before you get down all the floors. However in decent buildings with dual-cores (and stairwells) there should always be a hallway between the stairwells.

      That's why modern towerblocks are designed to isolate fires, so the safe thing to do is stay inside your place. Obviously, deregulation of building standards means that this doesn't happen, or they clad buildings in flammable material, thus bypassing safety features. After Grenfell, the next fire will result in a stampede regardless.

      As long as you can power lifts, and the lift shaft is isolated from the fire, then I'd suggest that the lift should be used for evacuation. And a lift like this is ideal, as you can have many in operation at once.

      Hopefully soon we will have drone rescue craft that can go up to high windows to save people externally.

    12. Re:Nice work, Mr Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you see the video? The elevator's horizontal speed was around the same speed as walking. So why not just walk?

      We live in a world where humans expend the additional effort to type text messages instead of simply speaking to each other in order to communicate, and yet are too lazy to get up and turn off a light switch, or open a browser to search for something, insisting that a voice-controlled in-home digital assistant needs to do that instead.

      Logic knows no bounds.

      Texts are asynchronous, I expect at scale they save a lot of time and effort over speech which requires coordinating two or more people in time (remember "phone tag").

    13. Re:Nice work, Mr Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So why not just walk?

      You're not thinking creatively enough.

      Maybe because there is no hallway to walk. With this kind of elevators, hallways full of doors can be a thing of the past - the elevator just drops you off at your destination.

      And.. If that's the case.. Your goose would be cooked in the event of a fire... Remember, you are NOT allowed to take the elevator...

    14. Re:Nice work, Mr Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WHy not take it one step back?

      3 shafts:
      Up (left) Stationary (middle) down (right).

      All doors are on the stationary shaft. All loading and unloading is done in the middle. Just like a normal elevator the stationary one will indicate if it will go up or down after current unload, If it's not needed right now it will either stay in place or go to the place where it is most likely to be needed statistically.

      Obviously this only solves the problem where there is still a hallway on each floor. But you'll get to your floor fast.

      Less serious part: And then you install squirt guns and AI/tracking to soak any bastard that stands in front of an elevator before everyone who wants to exit has had the chance to do so.

    15. Re:Nice work, Mr Musk by Ihlosi · · Score: 1
      Hopefully soon we will have drone rescue craft that can go up to high windows to save people externally.

      The issue with using rotorcraft is that in case of a fire, the air currents caused by the heat might make flying one near the building impossible.

  9. Re:But will the doors go "shhh!" when they travers by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 5, Informative

    Wrong reference. This is clearly a Willy Wonka elevator.

  10. Please let them call it... by uohcicds · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The WONKAVATOR

    PLEASE.

    --
    It's not you: I'm just this horrifically socially awkward with everybody.
  11. Power outage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What happens if there is a power outage? The elevator loses power?
    It will drop and everyone dies?

    1. Re:Power outage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In communist germany, elevator powers building.

    2. Re:Power outage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OMG! Nobody thought about that at ThyssenKrupp!

      Please phone them immediately before this technology dooms us all!

    3. Re:Power outage? by bugs2squash · · Score: 1

      no - the's a little bell that rings just before impact at the bottom of the shaft, just jump in the air when you hear it, or step out of the elevator.

      --
      Nullius in verba
  12. Total Recall? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How do I know that this is real, and not just an implanted memory?

  13. Turbolift by 4im · · Score: 1

    They should call it a Turbolift. Yes, as in Star Trek. Just don't give it an AI, please.

  14. Top-down design by SkyratesPlayer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    One way to think about elevators and high-rises is to start from the top. The uppermost part is a little building that only needs one elevator. As you add floors on the bottom they need more shafts so that you can fill and empty the building in a reasonable time. With conventional elevators, there is only one per shaft. (Although it can be more than one floor high.) At some point the next bottom floor you add will be all elevator shafts and unless you think you can make money from a more scenic view from the top, you stop. With this tech the elevators become cars on a vertical railway and can take on passengers without blocking shafts. Big gain.

    1. Re:Top-down design by judoguy · · Score: 1

      With this tech the elevators become cars on a vertical railway and can take on passengers without blocking shafts. Big gain.

      If you don't mind having to get off at one floor to transfer to another lift to get to the top floor since I doubt the system would allow the bottom car to go to the top floor unless you used that sideways feature to shunt cars out of the way.

      --
      Peace is easy to achieve, just surrender. Liberty is much harder get/keep.
    2. Re:Top-down design by DutchUncle · · Score: 1

      That's the point - you CAN shunt cars out of the way. Or, like a train system, you can use multiple shafts as local and express in each direction - and UNLIKE a train system, more like the phone system, you can dynamically reallocate which shaft is being used for what as usage changes during the day. The flexibility is what it's all about. Depends how long the track switch takes, of course, Your example of "get off at one floor to transfer to another lift" doesn't need to happen any more; a big office building that used to have multiple separate elevators for separate floor ranges can now have an "express" shaft to get to each range, then shunt to the "local" shaft for the floors within that range - but only during rush hour! In the middle of the day, with random usage, the shafts could be "up" and "down" for a cyclic pattern, or whatever simulation shows is the average most efficient.

  15. The cost of the elevator is the floor space by FeelGood314 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    On a 50 floor building an elevator 4'x6' will have a shaft a little larger plus a 10' waiting area in front of it, so say 15x8 or 120 feet square x 50 floors gives 6000 square feet. Times $1000 per square foot for grade A office space and your elevator is now taking up $6 million dollars worth of floor space.

    1. Re:The cost of the elevator is the floor space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just cuz it can go sideways doesn't mean anyone would make it go sideways.. just like a car they can go sideways but only wankers make them do that..

      the only real Benefits of sideways movement would be interconnections between buildings or pure wank value of a elevator that goes directly to each wankers office.. maybe a bit of security

      Downsides are like you said cost of space and maintenance but that's easily overcome by the need to show off who has the best/biggest...

    2. Re:The cost of the elevator is the floor space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So... what's the office space worth if the elevator is not there?

    3. Re:The cost of the elevator is the floor space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The primary benefit is not the sideways thing.

      Conventional lifts have a limit to the amount of vertical distance they can cover before various factors like the weight of the cable required make them impractical.
      So you end up having multiple shafts, both because you can only have a single car per shaft, and hence need more shafts to cope with the passenger load, and because you need different type of lift, local ones for the lower portion, and express ones to take you quickly up to the next lot that service the upper portion of the building.

      Put one of these in, and you've probably just saved a huge chunk of space that you can now charge for.

      The article says this costs 3-5 times a normal elevator system, but in a typical downtown skyscraper the space savings are expected to more than compensate for the cost.

    4. Re:The cost of the elevator is the floor space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "... your elevator is now taking up $6 million dollars worth of floor space."

      That was solved long ago. Put Elevators on the _outside_ of buildings, in the space normally allotted for gazing out of those long obsolete things in the age of Cubicles- windows.
      There might be temptation to put windows in the Elevator cars themselves, but that would be silly. People would dawdle.
      Maximizing Working space has taken a back seat to making buildings "Seamless", sheer facades of glass, steel, and concrete, with all sorts of Utility space inside wasted on... Utilities. Water, Sewer, Power, Heat, AC... all hidden away where they can't be seen and are thus difficult to service. But hang all of that stuff off the outside, and then get rid of windows, and they won't be seen anyway.
      We do tend to anthropomorphize so. Consider our Lungs. They also take up a lot of internal space that could be put to better use. Now if we turned them inside out, and hung them off of our backs instead, why that would free up enough space for a Coffee pot or two, or even a Mini-Bar. We would never have to look at our Lungs if we didn't want to; one would have to be a contortionist to do so anyway. There are other advantages- for instance cleaning. Hardly anybody goes to the trouble of giving their lungs a good regular healthy scrubbing.
      Which brings us back to windows. There might be temptations to install windows to see if say the Mini-Bar needs restocking. They are doing that with refrigerators these days, installing windows. But, and this is important, if you can glance down to check if there is still enough Gin, so can anybody else. This is a privacy issue.
      So maybe a couple of secure networked TV Cameras can be installed, behind the nipples, so that only you can keep tabs. Making an App for that shouldn't be too difficult.

    5. Re:The cost of the elevator is the floor space by swb · · Score: 2

      I could see where an elevator capable of both sideways and vertical movement could have some benefit in a building with a large horizontal footprint. I could see it used as a combination of lift and sort of shuttle train in a large, flat building.

      It might add flexibility in floor plans where a tenant wanted floor space without a central shaft breaking up the space.

    6. Re:The cost of the elevator is the floor space by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      The primary benefit is not the sideways thing.

      Conventional lifts have a limit to the amount of vertical distance they can cover before various factors like the weight of the cable required make them impractical. So you end up having multiple shafts, both because you can only have a single car per shaft, and hence need more shafts to cope with the passenger load, and because you need different type of lift, local ones for the lower portion, and express ones to take you quickly up to the next lot that service the upper portion of the building.

      Put one of these in, and you've probably just saved a huge chunk of space that you can now charge for.

      The article says this costs 3-5 times a normal elevator system, but in a typical downtown skyscraper the space savings are expected to more than compensate for the cost.

      Add to that the time saved by having multiple lifts per shaft

    7. Re:The cost of the elevator is the floor space by geekmux · · Score: 1

      On a 50 floor building an elevator 4'x6' will have a shaft a little larger plus a 10' waiting area in front of it, so say 15x8 or 120 feet square x 50 floors gives 6000 square feet. Times $1000 per square foot for grade A office space and your elevator is now taking up $6 million dollars worth of floor space.

      From TFS:

      "The elevator can cost 3 to 5 times more than a regular elevator -- but can handle higher buildings than a conventional elevator."

      Ever consider the millions wasted per year in business efficiency with a building full of employees who are forced to walk due to traditional designs?

      The efficiency gains also include traditional vertical movement too, since maglev speeds are likely going to only be restricted by human capability. I for one, vote for an elevator ride from the 75th floor that includes a free-fall mode to simulate weightlessness for a few seconds, with careful deceleration. Would be one hell of an attraction to work there.

    8. Re:The cost of the elevator is the floor space by religionofpeas · · Score: 2

      I for one, vote for an elevator ride from the 75th floor that includes a free-fall mode to simulate weightlessness for a few seconds, with careful deceleration. Would be one hell of an attraction to work there.

      Especially fun when you bring down a cart full of anvils with you.

    9. Re:The cost of the elevator is the floor space by locofungus · · Score: 2

      The primary benefit is not the sideways thing.

      I could imagine that the sideways thing could be the main benefit.

      Imagine a ten story building with two lift shafts and 10 cars. In a quiescent state there's one car parked on each floor.

      During light times, someone gets into a lift, the cars above or below move out of the way and then it travels to the required floor. The cars it has passed simultaneously shuffle up or down one floor and you're back to the quiescent state. In busy times there can be one up and one down shaft - but there doesn't need to be the same wait time, indeed the lifts could be positioned every other floor.

      Biggest issue with this I can see is the loading/unloading time. Ideally you'd want to do something similar to the way some London underground stations work where people leaving the lift go out through a different door to those entering the lift. Which may defeat any space savings from having fewer lift shafts.

      What I'm not sure about is whether the lift can safely move sideways while people are in it. Feels to me as though trying to stand in such a lift would be like trying to stand on a train or boat where the sideways forces require significant strength and coordination to remain standing unsupported.

      If the cars have multiple doors then you could have four lift shafts in a square array and every car would have four available directions to move.

      Of course, what you could do is open the doors and then rapidly move the lift sideways, ejecting the people out of the door (a-la pulling the table cloth off the table without disturbing what is on the table) and readying the lift for the next load ;-)

      --
      God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = -@B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t," and there was light.
    10. Re:The cost of the elevator is the floor space by DutchUncle · · Score: 1

      Imagine a ten story building with two lift shafts and 10 cars.

      Cool scenario, but overkill (pending simulation results :-) ) Take your idea with just 4 cars, which should get a large amount of the improvement (over the current 2 cars in two lift shafts). 10 cars means they spend a lot of energy getting out of the way all the time. And usage patterns would vary quite a bit; in a residence, where most trips are from home to lobby (or basement for wash/garbage), moving out of the way is a common activity, while an office building with trips between floors might well get a "working set" effect.

    11. Re:The cost of the elevator is the floor space by DutchUncle · · Score: 1

      You need the sideways movement to shuffle the cars around, even if you don't transport people sideways.

    12. Re:The cost of the elevator is the floor space by drew_kime · · Score: 1

      Someone is using a new flavor in their coffee.

      --
      Nope, no sig
    13. Re:The cost of the elevator is the floor space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So? The "cost" of floor space needed for elevators does not represent a loss. I'm pretty sure occupants gladly pay for the amenity.

    14. Re: The cost of the elevator is the floor space by mybecq · · Score: 1

      Yet without it, the office space is classed Grade Z (except the first floor).

    15. Re:The cost of the elevator is the floor space by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      You'd want to hack the elevator, get it going maximum speed up at the start of the free fall period, for maximum duration.

      Still wouldn't be long enough for sex. Maybe a set of elastic trapeze like position restraints, a deep, soft landing surface and a 'bounce hack'. If you could overpower the motors, get it to 30m/sec up. That's six seconds of zero-G per cycle. Getting crushed by 2 Gs, about half time, would have be worked into the rhythm. Extreme care would be needed, focus too.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    16. Re:The cost of the elevator is the floor space by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      If you're talking a 50-story building of grade A office space, you're not going to have just one elevator shaft. You'll have banks of elevators, potentially as many as 30, simply because you're limited to one car per shaft. Using your math, 30 elevators would mean 180,000 sqft of floor space (i.e. $180,000,000 at $1000/sqft).

      With this new technology, the limit of one car per shaft is broken.

      Suddenly, you can replace those 30 shafts with just four: one to go up, one to go down, one for entry and exit, and one for reloading (i.e. replacing cars in use so that each floor always has a car ready to be used). You'd only need one elevator door per floor, since the car could switch to the up or down track after you boarded. And because there'd always be an elevator waiting for you, you wouldn't need a waiting area at all.

      Removing the 10' waiting area reduces the footprint of each shaft from 120 sqft per floor to just 40 sqft per floor, and when you couple that with reducing the number of shafts from 30 to 4, we see the total footprint shrink from 3,600 sqft per floor to just 160 sqft per floor. Across 50 floors, that'd mean going from 180,000 sqft to just 8,000 sqft, or going from $180,000,000 of floor space to just $8,000,000, saving you $172,000,000 of floor space.

      All of which is to say, while sideways movement does open up novel possibilities, such quickly traveling between adjacent skyscrapers, the most valuable use for sideways movement will likely be having cars simply move between adjacent tracks. Doing so lets you break all sorts of assumptions that hold back traditional elevators.

    17. Re:The cost of the elevator is the floor space by hattig · · Score: 1

      Indeed, and if this elevator can replace 8+ elevator shafts with 4 (Up, Down, Loading 1, Loading 2, for example), that's a massive gain for the building in terms of floor space. You don't even need Up/Down to be accessible due to the transverse travel feature, so you can redesign your elevator shaft layout.

      I guess initial installs will be more conservative, but as the technology is proven and applied to taller buildings, you will see these improvements I'm sure.

    18. Re:The cost of the elevator is the floor space by Junta · · Score: 1

      I was thinking more that the parked cars would not be *in* the shaft.

      So to take your overkill example of 10 cars, 2 shafts. I'll assume that each floor has a 'station' in the middle of the shafts, where the cars actually go to load/unload.

      If only one car gets used, then the passenger boards, it shifts right into the right shaft, at the same time the car on the target floor shifts to the left shaft to do a swap. The other 8 cars stay stationary at their stations throughout the whole thing.

      This also means loading/unloading time is no huge deal, since that occurs while the lift is not in a shaft.

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    19. Re:The cost of the elevator is the floor space by hattig · · Score: 1

      A real world example:

      [quote]The Shard is 309.6 metres, or 1,016 feet, high and is Western Europe's tallest building.
      It is 95 storeys tall, with level 72 the highest habitable floor.
      The building is served by 36 lifts, some of which are double-decker.
      Lifts in The Shard travel at speeds of up to 6 metres a second.
      [/quote]

      Those lifts will be stacked, so there may be 18 at ground floor, but many will terminate third/halfway up, and then others will be on top in the same shaft, e.g., http://s.hswstatic.com/gif/wtc... because of maximum elevator height due to the ropes. So in this example, 12 lifts per floor perhaps, likely in two cores of six for redundancy and safety.

      This new system would likely end up being two cores of four (two accessible), but for the full height of the building. Some savings in floor space, but nothing drastic.

    20. Re:The cost of the elevator is the floor space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centre_Georges_Pompidou

      It's called "Structural Expressionism" these days. Four decades back, between taking exceedingly dull coursework in FORTRAN and Linear Algebra, I took some Architecture classes as well in Wurster Hall and the Naval Architecture Building. "Brutalism" was on its way out with the development of new construction methods and materials. (See "Concrete Canoes".) This was much more fun; we still used drafting boards and ducks and battens back then instead of Computer Aided Crap, and the Girls were much prettier, and far more numerous.
      Excuse me, my right nipple is percolating.

    21. Re:The cost of the elevator is the floor space by locofungus · · Score: 1

      Loading, unloading is still a problem. What about when everybody wants to leave at the end of the day? They'll all be stuck in cars waiting for the ground floor unload position to become free.

      And what's the advantage of having two shafts and a parking space over having three shafts? Uses the same floor space.

      --
      God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = -@B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t," and there was light.
    22. Re:The cost of the elevator is the floor space by Junta · · Score: 1

      You could have more parking spots on ground floor without other floors having to have shafts. The ability to have different number of parking spots on key floors is something feasible compared with having a lot of shafts.

      I imagine too that a shaft may be more expensive engineering wise than horizontal parking spots. Structurally I could easily see more space needed for a shaft than something more strictly horizontal.

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  16. Please by Trogre · · Score: 1

    Please let some kid named Charlie be the first to ride in it.

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    1. Re:Please by Zocalo · · Score: 2

      Perhaps after some system of golden tickets hidden in chocolate bars to select the lucky winners/unlucky victims?

      Actually, assuming this actually gets implemented somewhere (no doubt in some phallic monument to excess), I can well imagine that the owners of the building would do a Willy Wonka themed "Golden Ticket" competition to select some people for an all expenses paid trip to their opening night. Pretty obvious PR move for your new building as, while those who win are unlikely to care much beyond their prize, it's also going to raise your profile in the awareness of those that might be looking for new office space, apartments, retail, or hotel space that your building would presumably have quite a bit of available to rent/lease at sky high prices.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    2. Re:Please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's difficult to use random tickets and ensure that the winner is named Charlie. Of course you could send out lots of tickets in batches until you have at least one winner a child named Charlie, and invite all winners for a tour of some factory before the elevator ride. Then arrange for some kind of accident to happen to every child not named Charlie. In the end, provided that the maglev elevator has a sufficient amount of glass in its construction, you'll have the perfect PR opportunity.

  17. Re:But will the doors go "shhh!" when they travers by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

    Came for the Star Trek reference. Was not disappointed. Thanks.

    --
    Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  18. Re:Please let them call it... by Smidge204 · · Score: 0

    Huh, I was thinking of an entirely different movie...

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt01...

    =Smidge=

  19. Re:But will the doors go "shhh!" when they travers by ravenshrike · · Score: 1

    Nah, it's clearly the inferior Star Trek version. Can't go squareways.

  20. I grab my white coat and run to the elevator... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...and push the button to go right. In fact, this hospital is quite unique in that the floors are set up horizontally. This puts the first floor on the far right, with the second floor to its left and so on. My office is on the fifth floor, all the way to the left. I used all of my grandmother’s money to have it set up like that for a simple reason. If I stand directly to my sister’s left, the motion in space makes it so that as we move quickly from left to right, my penis finds itself in the same physical location as where her vagina was just a fraction of a second before. Aside from this brief interval, from a time-space continuum perspective it’s as if I have sexual relations with every person who steps in the elevator with me. This is impossible with traditional elevators that are required to move up and down instead of left and right.

  21. aaand its gonna crash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cut the electricity and that thing will just crash. Also, the power consumption is WAY too high compared to a regular elevator. No landlord will want that in their high rise building.

  22. defocused temporal perception by xtsigs · · Score: 0

    But will they have defocused temporal perception like the rest of the elevators in the galaxy?

  23. Re:But will the doors go "shhh!" when they travers by Required+Snark · · Score: 2

    There had better be chocolate at some of the stops or Mr. Wonka will come down hard with his prior art.

    --
    Why is Snark Required?
  24. Shielding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    One thing I haven't seen mentioned is shielding, for those with Pacemakers this would be a no-go. I wasn't allowed anywhere near the magnetic catapult testing at Lakehurst :(

  25. So how much cancer do I get? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So how much cancer do I get by using and/or working/living in a building with this tech?

    I've always wondered: Do compasses go crazy near these contraptions? Specifically things like the magneto compasses in phones and drones.

  26. And the most interesting feature... by Wdi · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Was not even mentioned in the summary. You can run multiple cabins in the same shaft, saving precious floor space (and move the cabins horizontally if they need to pass each other, or you can just assign up and down shafts). Thus, for larger buildings this type of elevator can actually be a major cost saver.

    1. Re:And the most interesting feature... by swillden · · Score: 2

      Was not even mentioned in the summary. You can run multiple cabins in the same shaft, saving precious floor space (and move the cabins horizontally if they need to pass each other, or you can just assign up and down shafts). Thus, for larger buildings this type of elevator can actually be a major cost saver.

      Just assigning up and down shafts would lose another important feature: the ability to load an elevator car at one floor and send it directly to the destination floor with no stops. That not only minimizes wait time for the people in the car, but also minimizes the time until the car is available again, increasing throughput.

      Ideally, the elevator system needs to know how many people are waiting at each floor, and their destination floors. I've seen one elevator system, in Google's DeepMind office in London, which tries to optimize elevator traffic using that information. Rather than just up/down call buttons, there's a numeric entry pad. If you're alone, you just type your destination floor. If you're with a group, you hit a "group" key, then the number of people, then the destination. After a few seconds, the display then tells you which elevator shaft you should go to.

      With this system, something similar should be done, but now a loaded car can move to a "through traffic only" shaft, where cars do not stop except briefly, to enter or leave the shaft. Perhaps the system should even designate a "long distance" shaft, used only by cars that are going to travel, say, 100+ floors without stopping... and then it could accelerate those cars to higher speed. Of course, the designation of a shaft for a given purpose need not be permanent. It's a dynamic optimization problem.

      Because each shaft is carrying multiple cars, you'd probably need more information than just which shaft your car is coming in. Instead, cars would need numbers. When you enter your group size and location the system would to tell you which door to go to and which car to wait for.

      In addition to the UI on the wall, you could also use your smartphone to call an elevator. Ideally, you could do that as you're walking to the elevator shaft, to reduce wait time at the elevator door. You could enter an elevator call request and the system could tell you through your phone which shaft to go to and how long before your car will arrive. When you're at the shaft, your phone could notify you when your car is arriving. With information about your precise location (perhaps via BLE beacons, or similar), the system could avoid scheduling a car too early, instead estimating your walking time to the elevator shaft based on your location and speed, perhaps revising your car assignment if you stop to chat or something.

      This could also be integrated with calendaring. If you have a meeting on another floor, your phone could ask the elevator system for estimated transit time, then notify you when you need to leave to get to your meeting on time, much as Google Now does for external transit now. When you start moving to go to the meeting, your phone could notify the elevator system which would assign you to a car then notify your phone, which would buzz and tell you which shaft to go and what time to be there.

      Turning it up to "ridiculous", the system could also optimize elevator sharing. Having a meeting with a group of people, all coming from the same floor (or close) and going to the same conference room on a distant floor? The phones and calendaring system could tell the system that these people would prefer to share a car, if all of them can be in one. Then you can just start your meeting while en route to the conference room. Or, work in the same building as your ex? Have your phone tell the system that you prefer not to share an elevator with that person. The system could also take status into account: some people could get preferential treatment, ensuring shorter wait times. I suppose it could also take urgency into account, giving preferential treatment to people who are running lat

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    2. Re:And the most interesting feature... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Up-shaft, down-shaft, Up-acceleration/stop shaft, down acceleration/stop shaft.

      That could be complicated, but I bet it would get pretty quick.

    3. Re:And the most interesting feature... by gmack · · Score: 1

      Imagine, an up shaft and a down shaft connected ladder style so the loading / unloading area is in the connecting tunnels. The car pulls in, loads/unloads while the other cars go up or down around it.

      This would already cut the amount of floor space required by half in the tower I used to work in It had 21 floors and 6 elevators not counting the ones that went to the basement. A system like that could cut the floor space used to half, while still being faster.

      As an added bonus, you could put more loading/unloading sections on the ground flood floor

    4. Re:And the most interesting feature... by swillden · · Score: 1

      Imagine, an up shaft and a down shaft connected ladder style so the loading / unloading area is in the connecting tunnels. The car pulls in, loads/unloads while the other cars go up or down around it.

      Very nice! Clearly, yes, this is the way to do it. In fact it's blindingly obvious :-)

      Plus in very tall buildings some additional shafts for "express" trips should be used so that elevators don't have to slow down for others that are stopping to enter the pickup area.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    5. Re:And the most interesting feature... by djinn6 · · Score: 1

      So basically a 2-lane road with roadside parking, except vertical.

  27. CUBE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a final step closer, problems start when you wake up INSIDE.

  28. Seriously... by Cryacin · · Score: 1

    Willy Wonka is suing.

    --
    Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
    1. Re:Seriously... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was thinking I was the only one that thought "Wonkvator"! when I saw this. Of course, it can't go slantwise.

    2. Re:Seriously... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL, first thing that came to my mind too...hopefully it doesn't end the same way :)

    3. Re:Seriously... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But can it go...square-ways?

    4. Re:Seriously... by tepples · · Score: 1

      Which Wonka? There are two Wonka organizations: the Dahl estate and Nestlé.

      (In-universe, they'd be seen as Wonka's biographer and the company that bought the company that bought the candy company from the Buckets, respectively.)

  29. Maglev Elevator? I don't think so. by JudgeFurious · · Score: 1

    This is a "Turbolift" and that's what it needs to be called. It's not a Great Glass Elevator at all and I don't know why anyone would get that impression. Nobody said anything about it flying up out of the building and soaring away on its own.

    --
    Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
  30. Willie had one! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WonkaVator.....

  31. Add AI and you will get H2G2 elevators by jfdavis668 · · Score: 1

    Not unnaturally, many elevators imbued with intelligence and precognition became terribly frustrated with the mindless business of going up and down, up and down, experimented briefly with the notion of going sideways, as a sort of existential protest, demanded participation in the decision-making process and finally took to squatting in basements sulking.

    1. Re:Add AI and you will get H2G2 elevators by hyades1 · · Score: 1

      ...Not unnaturally, many elevators imbued with intelligence and precognition became terribly frustrated with the mindless business of going up and down, up and down...

      This would explain the oft-repeated adage: "A stiff dick has no brain."

      --
      I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
  32. Bullet Train? by seven+of+five · · Score: 1

    Far as I know, the Japanese commuter bullet train has wheels. They had an experimental high speed maglev on a separate test track but it's not in commercial service.

    1. Re:Bullet Train? by squiggleslash · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yup. Also Hyperloop advocates get very heated if anyone suggests there's any kind of maglev technology involved (I suspect the submitter is confusing maglev with linear induction motors? That still doesn't explain the Bullet Train comment though...)

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    2. Re:Bullet Train? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When describing technology, using the correct term matters. Confusing levitation and propulsion is not a minor error, and reporters also tend to gloss over the fact that there are a number of (very) different levitation technologies. Maglev doesn't have to be expensive, and HTT will likely prove that.

      If Hyperloop Transportation Technologies rides the wave of hype to success, I will forgive them for co-opting the Hyperloop name. The system itself is very similar, even if they are replacing the levitation technology which made Hyperloop novel. It is an ideal opportunity to revive Inductrack, which was a remarkable technology, abandoned because it couldn't escape the shadow cast by earlier incarnations of overly expensive maglev technology.

    3. Re:Bullet Train? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Never let the truth get in the way of a good story. Just ask Rupert Murdoch.

  33. Why not combine them with cars/trains by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Build lift cabins as standardized people containers that can slide out of the building, onto a robocar rack that drives to the train station, into the maglev tube, to your destination building and floor.

  34. RTFM, typical garbage summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The video in the source makes it pretty clear it is running on rails and just using the induction motor to move it. No magnetic levitation involved. For one thing if there was, it'd push the thing away from the track, which isn't a useful direction for an elevator.

    It seems like a vertical, cog-based railway system should be able to do the same thing so I'm not sure the advantage of the induction motor here.

    1. Re:RTFM, typical garbage summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It seems like a vertical, cog-based railway system should be able to do the same thing so I'm not sure the advantage of the induction motor here.

      Usually the advantage to such things is two fold. 1. the "non contact" part where it's possible to avoid the car contacting the rails and thus avoid some friction losses and make a smoother ride... 2. The reduction in the number of mechanical parts that need maintenance and contribute to reducing the MTBF of the system by lowering complexity.

      In the case of an elevator though, it does seem to me that the advantages might not be worth it, except that in this case it also allows movement other than just up and down. I can see where that might be a huge advantage in very tall buildings where the space required for the elevator systems becomes prohibitively large unless you make it necessary for people going to the very top floors. Using this system, one could have more than one elevator in the same shaft at the same time and could greatly reduce the space needed for transportation. In a 5 story building, this whole idea is pointless, but in a 100 story building it could save quite a lot of space.

  35. In-building transport network by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Somebody mentioned the limitation of traditional lifts having just one car per shaft. So... if you make two vertical shafts connected with horizontal shafts at the top and bottom you could have an elevator loop. Left shaft goes up, right shaft goes down (or the other way around if you're not in the UK). One lift every minute or so. This waiting time may allow for lifts that stop at every floor vs lifts that don't - based on demand. You'll need 5-10 lifts and you should be able to continuously serve the entire building.

    I think even in Star Trek people used to wait for the Turbolift although the usual scenes showed instant availability.

    1. Re:In-building transport network by bugs2squash · · Score: 1

      doesn't a paternoster already do that ?

      --
      Nullius in verba
  36. Parachute! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... and airbags of course :)

  37. Experience with "smart" elevators by mattr · · Score: 2

    I have been in reserve-your-floor elevators and 2-cars-per-shaft elevators. I am not looking forward to the Wonkavator, unless they make it extremely human-friendly. It sounds cool but...

    The reserve-your-floor elevator would require floor selection by a keypad exterior to the cabin. It would refuse to accept other floor number entry from within the cabin, which is disconcerting if you just jump into a waiting cabin without entering a selection first. These were universally hated. The idea is the elevator is smarter than you and maximizes traffic but really it just was aggravating to anyone not used to it. (Customers and new employees)

    The 2-cars-per-shaft elevator would stop and everyone would look uncomfortably at each other in a progressively claustrophobic space. Also your ears would tend to pop from the height.

    I would feel a little better about 3D elevators if they would be guaranteed never to stop except in front of a door, and could be exited at any time if someone feels sick. If you tried to exit in an emergency would you be stuck in the middle of high voltage / EMF / mega-robot gears? The image of the exchanger gear is near from an engineering perspective in the way a funicular or trolley gear is, but you don't want to be climbing over one of those things. (maybe subject of a future James Bond movie?) If hacked you could literally lose people somewhere in a building. It brings so many potential neuroses I am not sure people will want to ride them. On the other hand for a factory they would be very cool.

  38. Moderated down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And I am ALSO responsible for modding you down. Because your post is so flagrantly off-topic, it doesn't matter whether you're correct or not.

    I have no objection to discussing politics or Islam, but I strongly object to changing every single topic to a discussion of your views of Islam.

    ...and I'm going to go back and moderate this post down as well, since a post discussing an off-topic post is also off-topic.

  39. Isn't that called a turbolift? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We had them since the late 60's in StarTrek right?

  40. The birth of... by Heebie · · Score: 1

    Witnessing the birth of the turbolift, a-la Star Trek. To those saying "watch it fall"... uhm... no.. for exactly as there are brakes that engage in the loss of power in a Star Trek turbolift... same thing here. All it takes is to have a solenoid set that, when power is NOT applied, clamps down. This can also be used to stabilise the lift when it is stopped at a door. These guys are probably just the first to make the turbolift concept work.

  41. Not the first by laughingskeptic · · Score: 2

    U.S. Navy has had contractors developing magnetic lifts for over 10 years: http://news.northropgrumman.co... (2005).

  42. Re:But will the doors go "shhh!" when they travers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I demand that the in-motion indicator and control handles from ST-TOS, as well as the TOS dramatic music whenever you are riding in it.

  43. Ditch the cable. Already being tried by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1
    To run multiple cars in one shaft you need to ditch the cable. Already some designs are being tried like this. Each car has its own traction motors, cog wheels, and guide rails. With emergency braking too.

    They are experimenting with two adjacent shafts, one up and the other down. Cars move horizontally to transfer from on shaft to another at the top floor and the basement.

    They are also moving the floor request button outside the car. Thus if three cars are going up, there is one request for floor A from floor B, only one car will stop at B and then at A. A very adaptable system, sort the passengers by destination before they enter a car, this alone doubles the capacity of elevators in large buildings.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Ditch the cable. Already being tried by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

      I believe Otis actually has a design for a system that uses linear induction motors & tracks for vertical and horizontal travel, but ALSO has the ability to grab onto one or more counterweighted cables for part or all of a trip (so they still get the partial benefit of counterweights). So an upward-bound elevator could grab onto a cable with a counterweight near the top of the building, then let go of the counterweight (which would then anchor itself in place until the next elevator grabbed onto it) if it needed to move horizontally or the weight reached the bottom of its shaft.

  44. But with your friendly explanation ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But with your friendly explanation ...

    Neither reading nor watching videos (actually far more frustrating for us time-sensitive individuals) is necessary.

    Thanks!

    But do try to avoid the hate speech ;-(

  45. One of Largest Global Elevator Builders by Koreantoast · · Score: 1

    ThyssenKrupp is the third largest elevator company on the planet. In the United States alone, they have over 30% market share and built the elevators for top landmarks including One World Trade Center and the Saint Louis Arch (they even have the Arch on their logo). The way the article is written, it sounds like a start-up, not one of the global elevator leaders. It's an important distinction as it adds a lot of credibility to the technology and the claims.

    1. Re:One of Largest Global Elevator Builders by Koreantoast · · Score: 1

      Correction, they didn't build the Arch Tram. Got it confused with something else. Stand by One World Trade Center though.

  46. What about power use? by Viol8 · · Score: 2

    Safety considerations aside - with a normal lift the motor only has to work against cabin weight - counter weight. Even hydraulic lifts can build up pressure when the cabin is descdneing. WIth this design the linear motor has to do all the work lifting the cabin up so unless there's some sort of regenerative braking system when it comes down this is going to be horribly power hungry and inefficient just when buildings are being required to reduce their power usage.

    1. Re:What about power use? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      So you gave a problem. Solved the problem in 2 seconds, then assumed the experts wouldn't have even considered the problem, let alone have solved it with a super-cap sitting in a smaller space than the mechanical gear used for a regular elevator.

      The problem you found is known, and trivial. Regeneration down powers the trip back up.

    2. Re:What about power use? by Viol8 · · Score: 0

      I was asking whether they did it, not whether it was fucking solvable you dribbling idiot.

  47. Naming it. by ldgeorge85 · · Score: 1

    Please call it a Turbolift!

  48. Cool. by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

    So long as there are backup failsafe safety systems in place comparable or better than conventional elevators, sounds good to me. Also, please make the control system as unhackable as possible, and make the at least some of the safety systems completely separate from the main control system, so if it is hacked, they can't use the elevators as murder weapons/weapons of mass destruction? Thanks.

    1. Re:Cool. by SuseLover · · Score: 1

      They're called Magnetic Eddy Current brakes and are used on many modern roller coasters. They are inherently failsafe (excluding the possibility of the brake rails coming detached from their mounts).

  49. Can't wait to say this... by cstacy · · Score: 1

    "Bridge!"

    I assume these will be voice controlled, after all.

  50. ST Turbo Lift -- Horizontal & Vertical by callahan2211 · · Score: 1
    --
    "There are no gods, no devils, no angels, no heaven or hell. There is only our natural world. Religion is but myth and
  51. just in time angst on demand by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    Now they just need an advanced AI that can see a few seconds into the future so they can arrive right before a passenger needs them.
    Then they can go sulk in the basement.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    1. Re:just in time angst on demand by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      We've had the computing power to track that for decades. Nobody cares. Elevators often return to the ground floor when not needed. But that's good only in the morning when more people are coming than leaving. At the end of the day, they should probably go 3/4th of the way up, to be closest to the next call button. "AI" could be used to record (thus predict) floor calls. This is simple probability, and isn't AI, and well within the capabilities of a 1960's elevator control system.

      People expect to wait 10 seconds at an elevator. Having them open as you get there won't help. Also, most buildings have fewer shafts than demand requires, so there's little idle time in an elevator.

      So "AI" has already fixed the problem, but nobody wanted it, and even if someone wanted it, it wouldn't matter, unless you broke the cardinal rule of elevators and moved people against the direction of travel (grabbing the guy on 95 after getting a pickup on 94 before heading to 1).

    2. Re: just in time angst on demand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cool

  52. Re:Please let them call it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You beat me to it. I had the same thought when I read that.

  53. Re:Please let them call it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The WONKAVATOR

    PLEASE.

    Now that just gives me the Willy's.....

  54. Colonel Panic? by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    Major Conglomerate?
    Admiral Appliance?

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  55. simple controller override by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    I'm sorry, what do YOU call a 95-story linear accelerator?
    Sounds like a bloody giant goddamn space gun in disguise to me.
    Probably could do double duty in some sort of civil defense program to drive off any aliens that attempt to molest the Earth.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  56. And when the magnets/controller/power fails? by hAckz0r · · Score: 1

    What applies the arresting breaks in the vertical motion? One of the major safety features of modern elevators was invented way back in the 1800's. When the tension of the cable is removed, breaks are automatically engaged to keep the elevator from moving. Without a physical cable this needs to be electronic and will be prone to failure along with the same electronics that controls the magnets lift. No lift, no breaks? Or is there a power and controller redundancy built into its emergency system?

  57. Re:But will the doors go "shhh!" when they travers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I realize that Raold Dahl's predates Douglas Adams's, but I assert that this is a Magrathean elevator.

  58. Otherwise known as by Bodhammer · · Score: 1

    Otherwise known as the Ray Rice-a-vator.

    --
    "I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
  59. you're trying to trick me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "If you can run a 500-tonne train on magnets at 500km/h you should be able to elevate a cabin of 500 kilograms or 1,000 kilograms at a speed of five metres per second,"

    i saw what you did there. you changed units on me! i don't want 5m/sec. i want 500km/h. give it to me!!

    1. Re:you're trying to trick me by ewhac · · Score: 1

      i want 500km/h. give it to me!!

      You quite sure about that? :-)

  60. Turbolift? by prefec2 · · Score: 1

    Sounds a lot like Star Trek turbo lifts. Anyway, as this company developed the German maglev train which was sold only once, they found one way to make a product out if it. As long as people build ridiculous tall houses such elevator might be a good idea.

  61. Elevator=efficiency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Has anybody pointed out that the counter-weighted elevator is one of the most efficient modes of transportation we have? Energy input versus mass movement. I see maglev as adding cost without actually adding useful capabiity (but physics and economics are easily trumped by marketing).

  62. NIMBY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given almost every escalator I have ever seen is down for maintenance constantly INCLUDING ones by Thyssen-I think I will let this be a tech I wont be an early adopter ie user PERIOD.

  63. Re:But will the doors go "shhh!" when they travers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can't go squareways.

    Or Wonkaways.